|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
| Saturday, 31 January 2004 |
 |
|
 |
News | |
| News Business Features Editorial Security Politics World Letters Sports Obituaries
|
by Sandasen Marasinghe Colombo High Court Judge Eric Basnayake yesterday dismissed the revision application filed by Chairman of Sri Lanka Telecom and Sri Lanka Cricket Board President Thilanga Sumathipala for a stay order against the orders made by the Colombo Additional Magistrate remanding him and issuing summons on him. Sumathipala is charged with aiding and abetting to send underworld figure Dhammika Amarasinghe to England to watch the World Cup Cricket series on a forged passport in 1999. The Court order stated that according to the petitioner, he was released by the Colombo Additional Magistrate on December 8, 2003 being satisfied that there was no sufficient material to warrant a charge against the petitioner. President's Counsel Rienzie Arsacularatne supporting the application submitted that the Magistrate accepted the plaint on December 10, 2003 and it was invalid since the petitioner was already dealt with two days earlier by a competent court. He submitted that the Magistrate erred in accepting the plaint on December 10 without vacating the order made on December 08, 2003. He moved to vacate the order remanding the petitioner on January 19, 2004. The Court order included that Senior State Counsel Yasantha Kodagoda in reply submitted that the order made by the Magistrate on December 8, 2003 was not a valid order and could be ignored completely. The Senior State Counsel submitted that the case was called on a motion by counsel for the petitioner to the Magistrate at 1.30 p.m. on December 8, 2003. On working days, motions were not accepted after 10 a.m. while that motion was accepted at 1.30 p.m. That was a holiday being a 'Poya day'. The case was not allocated to the Magistrate who entertained this motion. The record of this case was not before the Magistrate. The Magistrate used loose paper to write the order in the absence of the case record and the Magistrate had to face the penalty of his unorthodox act. The High Court Judge also stated that he observed the loose papers were annexed to the record later. The High Court order stated that under normal circumstances it was perfectly valid to surrender suspects before Magistrates on a holiday to make remand orders. He may make such orders without having the case record and may use fly leaves. These circumstances do not warrant regarding a discharge of a suspect. Motions have to be filed before a particular time in the morning. The High Court order further stated that the Magistrate did not mention a single section under which he made his order discharging the petitioner. The Magistrate stated in his order that police reported that investigations were still pending. The Senior State Counsel submitted that even if the Magistrate was entrusted with the hearing of this case, the Magistrate could not have discharged the suspect under section 120(3) as investigations were still pending. The High Court Judge stated in the order that he (Judge) considered the order made on December 8, 2003 an invalid order and there was no impediment in accepting the plaint on December 10. Senior State Counsel Yasantha Kodagoda, Senior State Counsel Priyantha Navana, Senior State Counsel Amendra Senaviratne, Senior State Counsel Dulip Jayakody, Senior State Counsel Sepala Ratnayake and Senior State Counsel Shanil Kularatne appeared for the Solicitor General and the Attorney General. President's Counsel Rienzie Arsacularatne, Saliya Pieris, Haren Gomas, Wasantha Batagoda, Priyantha Upali Amarasinghe and Thejitha Koralage appeared for the petitioner. |
|
News | Business | Features
| Editorial | Security
Produced by Lake House |
